Log in
Friday, 13 October 2017 08:18

Let's fix Electoral College. It'll be easy compared to gerrymandering: Lessig & Painter

Written by  USA Today

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer had just described a system in which “if party A wins a majority of votes, party A controls the legislature. That seems fair,” he said. Chief Justice John Roberts then jumped in: “If you need a convenient label for that approach,” Roberts offered, “you can call it ‘proportional representation,’ which has never been accepted as a political principle in the history of this country.

Most Americans would agree with Breyer that in a democracy, it is only “fair” that the party that gets more votes gets more seats. But Roberts was making a narrower point: His claim could not have been — because it would have been absurd — that in our tradition of representative democracy, the winner shouldn’t win. He meant instead that the court has never held that party proportionality was an overriding value in structuring legislative districts. Other values, like a connection to the community or districts that are compact or equal in size, are also important — and sometimes outweigh a simple interest in proportionality. 

More: Jolie, Paltrow and Harvey Weinstein: Shock, regrets and nothing changes

More: Al Sharpton: ESPN caved to Donald Trump on Jemele Hill and free speech

This is why partisan gerrymandering cases can be so hard: With so many legitimate values, it is easy to hide something illegitimate.

Read more at USA Today

User comments

There are no user comments for this listing.


New York


Humidity: 65%

Wind: 14 mph

  • 18 Oct 2017 70°F 48°F
  • 19 Oct 2017 72°F 54°F
Don't Forget To Like BlabberBuzz